Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening Practices Reported Via an Online Survey.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer screening guidelines differ between organizations, and significant variations in practice patterns exist. Previous evidence suggests that provider-level factors are the greatest contributors to risk assessment and screening practice variability. This study aimed to characterize provider factors associated with breast cancer risk assessment and screening practice patterns, and to assess perceived barriers to providing risk assessment. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to providers at a single academic institution and to providers publicly via social media (January to August 2022). Respondents in the United States who care for adult women at risk for the development of breast cancer were included. RESULTS: Most of the respondents in the 143 completed surveys were white/Caucasian (79%) females (90%) age 50 years or younger (79%), and whereas 97% discuss breast cancer screening with their patients, only 90% order screening mammograms. Risk factor assessment was common (93%), typically performed at the first visit (51%). Additional training in genetics or risk assessment was uncommon (17%), although the majority were interested but did not have the time or resources (55%). Although most (64%) did not perceive barriers to providing risk assessment or appropriate screening, the most common barriers were time (77%) and education (55%). Barriers were more common among family practice or obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) providers and those who worked in an academic setting (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer risk assessment and screening practices are highly variable. Although time is the major barrier to providing risk assessment, providers also need education. Primary care organizations could partner with breast cancer-focused societies for additional resources.

Contrast-Enhanced In-Phase Dixon Sequence: Impact on Biopsy Clip Detection on Breast MRI.

BACKGROUND. Identification of breast biopsy clips using conventional MRI sequences may be challenging. A contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon sequence may have greater conspicuity for areas of susceptibility compared with standard clinical sequences. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to compare detection of breast biopsy clips on MRI between the contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon sequence and three routine clinical sequences. METHODS. This retrospective study included 164 patients (mean age, 50.3 years) with a total of 281 breast biopsy clips who underwent contrast-enhanced breast MRI between January 2, 2019, and April 16, 2020. Three radiologists, blinded to the clip location and sequence used, independently annotated biopsy clip locations on three clinical sequences (T1-weighted non-fat-suppressed [NFS], STIR, and first phase from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted fat-suppressed [FS]) and on a contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon sequence and then recorded confidence scores (1-4 scale). A study coordinator used all available imaging and reports to localize clips on MRI, which served as the reference standard. A physicist measured clip CNR. Sequences were compared using the McNemar test and two-tailed Wilcoxon signed rank tests. RESULTS. Among the three readers, pooled sensitivity and PPV were 78.2% and 96.2% for T1-weighted NFS, 26.6% and 92.7% for STIR, 61.7% and 95.9% for contrast-enhanced T1-weighted FS, and 85.1% and 95.1% for contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon sequence. Pooled sensitivity was higher for contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon sequence than for the other sequences (all p < .05); pooled PPV was not significantly different between contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon and the other sequences (all p > .05). Mean confidence scores (pooled across readers for true-positive assessments) and mean CNR were 3.0 ± 0.9 (SD) and 1.21 ± 0.61 for T1-weighted NFS, 1.7 ± 0.9 and 0.57 ± 0.69 for STIR, 2.5 ± 1.0 and 0.54 ± 0.61 for contrast-enhanced T1-weighted FS, and 3.5 ± 0.8 and 4.05 ± 2.6 for the contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon sequence. Pooled mean confidence scores and CNR were higher for contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon than for the other sequences (all p < .001). CONCLUSION. Compared with clinical sequences, the contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon sequence had higher sensitivity for detecting breast biopsy clips on MRI and higher reader confidence and CNR, without change in PPV. CLINICAL IMPACT. The contrast-enhanced in-phase Dixon sequence may help address a current challenge in clinical breast MRI interpretation.

Mixed-Methods Study to Predict Upstaging of DCIS to Invasive Disease on Mammography.

BACKGROUND. The incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has steadily increased, as have concerns regarding overtreatment. Active surveillance is a novel treatment strategy that avoids surgical excision, but identifying patients with occult invasive disease who should be excluded from active surveillance is challenging. Radiologists are not typically expected to predict the upstaging of DCIS to invasive disease, though they might be trained to perform this task. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a mixed-methods two-stage observer study can improve radiologists' ability to predict upstaging of DCIS to invasive disease on mammography. METHODS. All cases of DCIS calcifications that underwent stereotactic biopsy between 2010 and 2015 were identified. Two cohorts were randomly generated, each containing 150 cases (120 pure DCIS cases and 30 DCIS cases upstaged to invasive disease at surgery). Nine breast radiologists reviewed the mammograms in the first cohort in a blinded fashion and scored the probability of upstaging to invasive disease. The radiologists then reviewed the cases and results collectively in a focus group to develop consensus criteria that could improve their ability to predict upstaging. The radiologists reviewed the mammograms from the second cohort in a blinded fashion and again scored the probability of upstaging. Statistical analysis compared the performances between rounds 1 and 2. RESULTS. The mean AUC for reader performance in predicting upstaging in round 1 was 0.623 (range, 0.514-0.684). In the focus group, radiologists agreed that upstaging was better predicted when an associated mass, asymmetry, or architectural distortion was present; when densely packed calcifications extended over a larger area; and when the most suspicious features were focused on rather than the most common features. Additionally, radiologists agreed that BI-RADS descriptors do not adequately characterize risk of invasion, and that microinvasive disease and smaller areas of DCIS will have poor prediction estimates. Reader performance significantly improved in round 2 (mean AUC, 0.765; range, 0.617-0.852; p = .045). CONCLUSION. A mixed-methods two-stage observer study identified factors that helped radiologists significantly improve their ability to predict upstaging of DCIS to invasive disease. CLINICAL IMPACT. Breast radiologists can be trained to better predict upstaging of DCIS to invasive disease, which may facilitate discussions with patients and referring providers.

Breast cancer deaths averted over 3 decades.

BACKGROUND: From 1975 to 1990, female breast cancer mortality rates in the United States increased by 0.4% per year. Since 1990, breast cancer mortality rates have fallen between 1.8% and 3.4% per year, a decrease that is attributed to increased mammography screening and improved treatment. METHODS: The authors used age-adjusted female breast cancer mortality rate and population data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program to estimate the number of breast cancer deaths averted by screening mammography and improved treatment since 1989. Four different assumptions regarding background mortality rates (in the absence of screening mammography and improved treatment) were used to estimate deaths averted for women aged 40 to 84 years by taking the difference between SEER-reported mortality rates and background mortality rates for each 5-year age group, multiplied by the population for each 5-year age group. SEER data were used to estimate annual and cumulative breast cancer deaths averted in 2012 and 2015 and extrapolated SEER data were used to estimate deaths averted in 2018. RESULTS: The number of single-year breast cancer deaths averted ranged from 20,860 to 33,842 in 2012, from 23,703 to 39,415 in 2015, and from 27,083 to 45,726 in 2018. Breast cancer mortality reductions ranged from 38.6% to 50.5% in 2012, from 41.5% to 54.2% in 2015, and from 45.3% to 58.3% in 2018. Cumulative breast cancer deaths averted since 1989 ranged from 237,234 to 370,402 in 2012, from 305,934 to 483,435 in 2015, and from 384,046 to 614,484 in 2018. CONCLUSIONS: Since 1989, between 384,000 and 614,500 breast cancer deaths have been averted through the use of mammography screening and improved treatment.

Can Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Replace Full-Field Digital Mammography? A Multireader, Multicase Study of Wide-Angle Tomosynthesis.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis whether two-view wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) can replace full-field digital mammography (FFDM) for breast cancer detection. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. In a multireader multicase study, bilateral two-view FFDM and bilateral two-view wide-angle DBT images were independently viewed for breast cancer detection in two reading sessions separated by more than 1 month. From a pool of 764 patients undergoing screening and diagnostic mammography, 330 patient-cases were selected. The endpoints were the mean ROC AUC for the reader per breast (breast level), ROC AUC per patient (subject level), noncancer recall rates, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS. Twenty-nine of 31 readers performed better with DBT than FFDM regardless of breast density. There was a statistically significant improvement in readers' mean diagnostic accuracy with DBT. The subject-level AUC increased from 0.765 (standard error [SE], 0.027) for FFDM to 0.835 (SE, 0.027) for DBT (p = 0.002). Breast-level AUC increased from 0.818 (SE, 0.019) for FFDM to 0.861 (SE, 0.019) for DBT (p = 0.011). The noncancer recall rate per patient was reduced by 19% with DBT (p < 0.001). Masses and architectural distortions were detected more with DBT (p < 0.001); calcifications trended lower (p = 0.136). Accuracy for detection of invasive cancers was significantly greater with DBT (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION. Reader performance in breast cancer detection is significantly higher with wide-angle two-view DBT independent of FFDM, verifying the robustness of DBT as a sole view. However, results of perception studies in the vision sciences support the inclusion of an overview image.

Suspicious breast calcifications undergoing stereotactic biopsy in women ages 70 and over: Breast cancer incidence by BI-RADS descriptors.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the malignancy rate overall and for specific BI-RADS descriptors in women ≥70 years who undergo stereotactic biopsy for calcifications. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 14,577 consecutive mammogram reports in 6839 women ≥70 years to collect 231 stereotactic biopsies of calcifications in 215 women. Cases with missing images or histopathology and calcifications associated with masses, distortion, or asymmetries were excluded. Three breast radiologists determined BI-RADS descriptors by majority. Histology, hormone receptor status, and lymph node status were correlated with BI-RADS descriptors. RESULTS: There were 131 (57 %) benign, 22 (10 %) atypia/lobular carcinomas in situ, 55 (24 %) ductal carcinomas in situ (DCIS), and 23 (10 %) invasive diagnoses. Twenty-seven (51 %) DCIS cases were high-grade. Five (22 %) invasive cases were high-grade, two (9 %) were triple-negative, and three (12 %) were node-positive. Malignancy was found in 49 % (50/103) of fine pleomorphic, 50 % (14/28) of fine linear, 25 % (10/40) of amorphous, 20 % (3/15) of round, 3 % (1/36) of coarse heterogeneous, and 0 % (0/9) of dystrophic calcifications. CONCLUSIONS: Among women ≥70 years that underwent stereotactic biopsy for calcifications only, we observed a high rate of malignancy. Additionally, coarse heterogeneous calcifications may warrant a probable benign designation. KEY POINTS: • Cancer rates of biopsied calcifications in women ≥70 years are high • Radiologists should not dismiss suspicious calcifications in older women • Coarse heterogeneous calcifications may warrant a probable benign designation.

Relationships Between MRI Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Lexicon Descriptors and Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes: Internal Enhancement is Associated with Luminal B Subtype.

The aim of this study was to determine the associations between breast MRI findings using the Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon descriptors and breast cancer molecular subtypes. In this retrospective, IRB-approved, single institution study MRIs from 278 women with breast cancer were reviewed by one of six fellowship-trained breast imagers. Readers reported BI-RADS descriptors for breast masses (shape, margin, internal enhancement) and non-mass enhancement (distribution, internal enhancement). Pathology reports were reviewed for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2). Surrogates were used to categorize tumors by molecular subtype: ER/PR+, HER2- (luminal A); ER/PR+, HER2+ (luminal B); ER/PR-, HER2+ (HER2); ER/PR/HER2- (basal). A univariate logistic regression model was developed to identify associations between BI-RADS descriptors and molecular subtypes. Internal enhancement for mass and non-mass enhancement was combined for analysis. There was an association between mass shape and basal subtype (p = 0.039), which was more frequently round (17.1%) than other subtypes (range: 0-8.3%). In addition, there was an association between mass margin and HER2 subtype (p = 0.040), as HER2 cancers more frequently had a smooth margin (33.3%) than other subtypes (range: 4.2-17.1%). Finally, there was an association between internal enhancement and luminal B subtype (p = 0.003), with no cases of luminal B cancer demonstrating homogeneous internal enhancement versus a range of 10.9-23.5% for other subtypes. There are associations between breast cancer molecular subtypes and lesion appearance on MRI using the BI-RADS lexicon.

Impact of Breast Density Notification Legislation on Radiologists' Practices of Reporting Breast Density: A Multi-State Study.

Purpose To evaluate the impact of breast density notification legislation on breast density reporting by radiologists nationally. Materials and Methods The institutional review board exempted this HIPAA-compliant retrospective study from the requirement for informed consent. State-level data over a 5-year period on breast density categorization and breast cancer detection rate were collected from the National Mammography Database (NMD). Z tests were used to calculate differences in proportions. Results Facilities in 13 of 17 states that had breast density notification legislation as of 2014 submitted data to the NMD before and after law enactment. A total of 1 333 541 mammographic studies (hereafter called "mammograms") over a 30-month period, beginning 20 months before and continuing 10 months after law enactment, were included in the analysis. There was a small but statistically significant decrease in the percentage of mammograms reported as showing dense breast tissue (hereafter called "dense mammograms") in the month before law enactment compared with the month after (43.0% [22 338 of 52 000] vs 40.0% [18 604 of 46 464], P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in the percentage of mammograms reported as dense in the month before law enactment compared with the 10th month after (43.0% [22 338 of 52 000] vs 42.8% [15 835 of 36 991], P = .65). There were no significant differences in the breast cancer detection rate between the month before and the month after law enactment (3.9 vs 3.8 cancers per 1000 mammograms, P = .79) or between the month before law enactment and the 10th month after (3.9 vs 4.2 cancers per 1000 mammograms, P = .55). In 21 analyzed states without breast density notification legislation, the percentage of mammograms reported as dense did not decrease below 42.8% (43 363 of 101 394) from 2010 to 2014, in contrast to 13 analyzed states with breast density notification legislation, which reached a nadir of 39.3% (20 965 of 53 360) (P < .001). Conclusion The percentage of mammograms reported as dense slightly decreased immediately after enactment of breast density notification legislation but then returned to prelegislation percentages within 10 months. (©) RSNA, 2016.

Can breast cancer molecular subtype help to select patients for preoperative MR imaging?

PURPOSE: To assess whether breast cancer molecular subtype classified by surrogate markers can be used to predict the extent of clinically relevant disease with preoperative breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study, informed consent was waived. Preoperative breast MR imaging reports from 441 patients were reviewed for multicentric and/or multifocal disease, lymph node involvement, skin and/or nipple invasion, chest wall and/or pectoralis muscle invasion, or contralateral disease. Pathologic reports were reviewed to confirm the MR imaging findings and for hormone receptors (estrogen and progesterone subtypes), human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2 subtype), tumor size, and tumor grade. Surrogates were used to categorize tumors by molecular subtype: hormone receptor positive and HER2 negative (luminal A subtype); hormone receptor positive and HER2 positive (luminal B subtype); hormone receptor negative and HER2 positive (HER2 subtype); hormone receptor negative and HER2 negative (basal subtype). All patients included in the study had a histologic correlation with MR imaging findings or they were excluded. χ(2) analysis was used to compare differences between subtypes, with multivariate logistic regression analysis used to assess for variable independence. RESULTS: Identified were 289 (65.5%) luminal A, 45 (10.2%) luminal B, 26 (5.9%) HER2, and 81 (18.4%) basal subtypes. Among subtypes, significant differences were found in the frequency of multicentric and/or multifocal disease (luminal A, 27.3% [79 of 289]; luminal B, 53.3% [24 of 45]; HER2, 65.4% [17 of 26]; basal, 27.2% [22 of 81]; P < .001) and lymph node involvement (luminal A, 17.3% [50 of 289]; luminal B, 35.6% [26 of 45]; HER2, 34.6% [nine of 26]; basal 24.7% [20 of 81]; P = .014). Multivariate analysis showed that molecular subtype was independently predictive of multifocal and/or multicentric disease. CONCLUSION: Preoperative breast MR imaging is significantly more likely to help detect multifocal and/or multicentric disease and lymph node involvement in luminal B and HER2 molecular subtype breast cancers. Molecular subtype may help to select patients for preoperative breast MR imaging.

Evaluation of Pathologic Nipple Discharge: What is the Added Diagnostic Value of MRI?

PURPOSE: To determine the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the evaluation of patients with pathologic nipple discharge. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of women with nipple discharge who underwent breast MRI between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2013. Radiographic findings, pathology results, and clinical notes were reviewed. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of MRI were calculated. RESULTS: Over a 10-year period, 103 women (mean age 46 years, range 25-72 years) underwent MRI for evaluation of nipple discharge. Ninety-one patients (88 %) underwent surgical excision or had clinical and/or radiographic follow-up at least 2 years after presentation and thus comprise the study population. Eleven (30 %) of 37 patients with MRIs coded as American College of Radiology Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 of 5 were diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (n = 6) or invasive adenocarcinoma (n = 5). Seven (64 %) of 11 patients diagnosed with malignancy had a negative mammographic and sonographic workup. None of the patients with MRIs coded as BI-RADS 1, 2, or 3 was diagnosed with malignancy immediately after presentation or during the 2-year follow-up period. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI for the detection of malignancy were 100 % (11 of 11) and 68 % (54 of 80), respectively. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 37 and 100 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MRI is a valuable additional diagnostic tool for the evaluation of pathologic nipple discharge when conventional imaging is negative. A negative MRI in this symptomatic population may obviate the need for duct exploration and excision.

Diagnostic Value of Ultrasound in Female Patients With Nipple Discharge.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the contribution of ultrasound to the evaluation of patients with pathologic nipple discharge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of the records of females who presented with nipple discharge between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2011. Pathologic nipple discharge was defined as discharge with one or more of the following features: unilateral, clear or bloody, and spontaneous. Patients underwent bilateral mammography followed by ultrasound directed at the subareolar portion of the affected breast. Radiologic findings and pathologic results were reviewed. RESULTS: Over a 3-year period, 327 females (mean age, 48 years; range, 13-88 years) presented with nipple discharge. Among these patients, 273 (83%) underwent surgical excision or clinical or radiographic follow-up at least 2 years after presentation and composed the study population. Among the 273 patients, 262 (96%) underwent mammography and 246 (90%) underwent sonography. Among 252 patients who had at least one pathologic feature of nipple discharge and underwent surgical excision or at least 2 years of follow-up, a total of 20 (8%) cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive adenocarcinoma were diagnosed. DCIS or invasive adenocarcinoma was diagnosed in eight patients with normal sonographic findings. For the detection of DCIS and invasive adenocarcinoma, the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound were 56% (10/18) and 75% (170/228); the sensitivity and specificity of mammography were 15% (3/20) and 98% (237/242). CONCLUSION: For females presenting with pathologic nipple discharge, ultrasound is a useful diagnostic tool and may be worth including in the routine evaluation.

Architectural Distortion on Mammography: Correlation With Pathologic Outcomes and Predictors of Malignancy.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to determine the risk of malignancy associated with architectural distortion and to evaluate the imaging and clinical features that may contribute to the prediction of malignancy in the setting of architectural distortion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of architectural distortion cases from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2013. Imaging findings and pathology outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS: Over the 10-year study period, architectural distortion that was considered to be suspicious for or highly suggestive of malignancy was present in 435 of 231,051 (0.2%) mammographic examinations. Cases were excluded if the main finding described was a mass with an associated feature of architectural distortion (n = 62) or if no pathology results were available (n = 4). Two hundred seventy-five cases of invasive adenocarcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were identified; the positive predictive value (PPV) was therefore 74.5% (275/369). DCIS alone was identified in only 4.1% (15/369). The most common benign finding on pathology was a radial scar or complex sclerosing lesion (27/369, 7.3%). Architectural distortion was less likely to represent malignancy on screening mammography than on diagnostic mammography (67.0% vs 83.1%, respectively; p < 0.001). Architectural distortion without a sonographic correlate was less likely to represent malignancy than architectural distortion with a correlate (27.9% vs 82.9%, respectively; p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the malignancy rate between pure architectural distortion and architectural distortion with calcifications or asymmetries (73.0% vs 78.8%; p = 0.26). CONCLUSION: The PPV of architectural distortion for malignancy is 74.5%. Architectural distortion is less likely to represent malignancy if detected on screening mammography than on diagnostic mammography or if there is no sonographic correlate.

Frequency of Malignancy and Imaging Characteristics of Probably Benign Lesions Seen at Breast MRI.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were to evaluate the frequency, follow-up compliance, and cancer rate of MRI BI-RADS category 3 lesions and to determine the cancer rate for individual BI-RADS descriptors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of breast MRI examinations with an assessment of probably benign (BI-RADS category 3) from among 4279 consecutive breast MRI examinations performed from January 2005 through December 2009. The review revealed 282 (6.6%) examinations with 332 lesions defined as BI-RADS 3. Pathologic results, 2 years of follow-up imaging findings, or both were reviewed. The frequency of BI-RADS 3 assessments, follow-up imaging compliance, and cancer yield were calculated. Three fellowship-trained breast imagers reevaluated all lesions and recorded descriptors from the MRI lexicon of the fifth edition of the BI-RADS atlas. The distribution and likelihood of malignancy for each descriptor were calculated. RESULTS: The follow-up compliance rate was 84.3% (280/332), and the malignancy rate was 4.3% (12/280). There were 50 (17.9%) individual foci, 61 (21.8%) multiple foci, 74 (26.4%) masses, and 95 (33.9%) nonmass enhancement lesions. Masses were most commonly oval (59.5% [44/74]), circumscribed (75.7% [56/74]), and homogeneously enhancing (43.2% [32/74]). Nonmass enhancement was most commonly focal (57.9% [55/95]) with heterogeneous enhancement (53.7% [51/95]) Most of the lesions had persistent kinetics (74.3% [208/280]). The background parenchymal enhancement was most commonly mild (51.1% [143/280]). CONCLUSION: MRI BI-RADS category 3 is not frequently used, and the levels of patient compliance with follow-up imaging are acceptable. The cancer yield for probably benign lesions is greater for MRI-detected than for mammographically detected lesions, especially for specific BI-RADS descriptors.

Interobserver Variability Between Breast Imagers Using the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS MRI Lexicon.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the interobserver variability of users of the MRI lexicon in the fifth edition of the BI-RADS atlas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three breast imaging specialists reviewed 280 routine clinical breast MRI findings reported as BI-RADS category 3. Lesions reported as BI-RADS 3 were chosen because variability in the use of BI-RADS descriptors may influence which lesions are classified as probably benign. Each blinded reader reviewed every study and recorded breast features (background parenchymal enhancement) and lesion features (lesion morphology, mass shape, mass margin, mass internal enhancement, nonmass enhancement distribution, nonmass enhancement internal enhancement, enhancement kinetics) according to the fifth edition of the BI-RADS lexicon and provided a final BI-RADS assessment. Interobserver variability was calculated for each breast and lesion feature and for the final BI-RADS assessment. RESULTS: Interobserver variability for background parenchymal enhancement was fair (ĸ = 0.28). There was moderate agreement on lesion morphology (ĸ = 0.53). For masses, there was substantial agreement on shape (ĸ = 0.72), margin (ĸ = 0.78), and internal enhancement (ĸ = 0.69). For nonmass enhancement, there was substantial agreement on distribution (ĸ = 0.69) and internal enhancement (ĸ = 0.62). There was slight agreement on lesion kinetics (ĸ = 0.19) and final BI-RADS assessment (ĸ = 0.11). CONCLUSION: There is moderate to substantial agreement on most MRI BI-RADS lesion morphology descriptors, particularly mass and nonmass enhancement features, which are important predictors of malignancy. Considerable disagreement remains, however, among experienced readers whether to follow particular findings.

Patient Preferences of Breast Radiologists' Attire and Appearance.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To assess patient preferences for breast radiologists' attire and appearance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multi-institutional anonymous, voluntary 19-question survey was administered to patients undergoing screening and diagnostic mammography examinations over a 5-week period. Using a 5-point Likert scale, respondents were asked about their preferences for gender-neutral attire (white coat), male-presenting attire (scrubs, dress shirt with tie, or dress shirt without tie), and female-presenting attire (scrubs, dress, blouse with pants, and blouse with skirt). Patient responses were compared to demographic data using bivariable analysis and multivariable regression. RESULTS: Response rate was 84.7% (957/1130). Mean respondent age was 57.2 years±11.9. Most respondents agreed/strongly agreed that the breast radiologist's appearance mattered (52.5%, 502/956) followed by being indifferent (28.1%, 269/956). Respondents with greater education levels felt less strongly (p=0.001) about the radiologist's appearance: 63.3% (70/110) less than college cared about appearance compared to 53.5% (266/497) college/vocational and 47.4% (165/348) graduate. Most respondents felt indifferent about a breast radiologist wearing a white coat (68.9%, 657/954) or about male-presenting breast radiologists wearing a tie (77.1%, 734/952) without significant demographic differences. Almost all respondents either prefer/strongly prefer (60.1%, 572/951) or were indifferent (39.6%, 377/951) to all breast radiologists wearing scrubs when performing procedures. While respondents approved of all attire choices overall, most respondents preferred scrubs for both male- and female-presenting breast radiologists (64.0%, 612/957 and 64.9%, 621/957, respectively). CONCLUSION: A variety of breast radiologists' attire can be worn while maintaining provider professionalism and without compromising patient expectations.

Impact of Interruptions During Screening Mammography on Physician Well-Being and Patient Care.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of interruptions on radiologists' efficiency, accuracy, and job satisfaction in interpreting screening mammograms. METHODS: This institutional review board-approved retrospective reader study recruited nine breast radiologists from a single academic institution [name withheld] to interpret 150 screening mammograms performed between December 1, 2008, and December 31, 2015 under two different reading conditions, as follows: (1) uninterrupted batch reading and (2) interrupted reading. The 150 cases consisted of 125 normal mammograms and 25 mammograms with subtle breast cancers. Cases were divided into two groups of 75 cases each (cohort 1 and cohort 2), with a comparable distribution of cancer cases. Four rounds of 75 cases each were conducted with a 6-week washout period between rounds 2 and 3. After completing each interpretation session, readers completed a seven-question survey, assessing perceptions of mental and physical effort, level of frustration, and performance satisfaction. Clinical performance metrics (reading time, recall rate, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive predictive value 1) were calculated. RESULTS: Recall rates were significantly (P = .04) higher during interrupted reading sessions (35.4%) than they were during uninterrupted batch reading sessions (31.4%). Accuracy was significantly (P = .049) worse in the interrupted reading sessions (69.5%), compared with uninterrupted sessions (73.6%). Differences in overall image interpretation times were not statistically significant (P = .065). Compared with uninterrupted batch reading sessions, readers during interrupted sessions reported feeling busier (P < .001), encountered higher levels of cognitive demand (P = .005), experienced elevated levels of physical fatigue (P = .004), and expressed lower levels of satisfaction with their performance (P = .041). CONCLUSION: Interruptions during interpretation of screening mammography have deleterious effects on physician performance and their sense of well-being.

Ethanol Sclerotherapy for Postoperative Seroma of the Breast and Axilla.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effectiveness of alcohol sclerotherapy in postoperative breast and axillary seromas. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved retrospective review of consecutive patients from 2017 to 2021. The procedure involves aspiration of seroma fluid, injection of ethanol for 15 to 30 minutes, and then aspiration of the injected ethanol. Following review of the medical record, patient and procedure data were recorded. Success was defined as no recurrence of seroma. Statistical analysis was performed using a chi-square or t-test, as appropriate. RESULTS: Twenty seromas were treated in 19 patients (mean age, 63 years; range, 49-79) following mastectomy (9/20, 45%), lumpectomy (25%, 5/20), axillary nodal dissection (5/20, 25%), or chest wall surgery (1/20, 5%). The mean seroma volume was 146 ±â€…165 mL. There was a mean of 1.4 prior aspiration attempts (range, 0-3). Mean injected ethanol volume was 39 mL (range, 8-60 mL) for a mean of 26 ±â€…5 minutes. Seromas recurred in 85% (17/20) of cases, and repeat aspiration was performed in 35% (6/17). The mean recurrence time was 34 ±â€…29 days. The recurrent seromas were 31% smaller (mean, 80 ±â€…48 mL). Only a smaller pre-ablation seroma was associated with successful ablation (P < 0.01), as the mean pre-ablation volume was 36 ± 24 mL for successful ablations and 119 ±â€…56 mL for unsuccessful ablations. There were no post-procedural complications. CONCLUSION: Single-treatment ethanol sclerotherapy is typically unsuccessful in ablating breast and axillary seromas. Only a smaller pre-ablation seroma size was associated with successful ablation.